[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48B471F7.1080907@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:13:27 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mutex: add mutex_lock_timeout()
>> However what you can do is to ask Len again when he's back. Ultimately
>> it is his decision and he might decide that he can deal with AML lockdep
>> issues longer term.
>
> For instance these changes could go into linux-next until the 2.6.29
> merge window .. Len should be back by then, and we should have a much
> better idea what kind of problems may exist, if any..
Sorry I'm not convinced that linux-next testing can resolve that.
It doesn't really have enough hardware/tester coverage. Also linux-next
is really only for stuff that is going to be merged, and from
my current perspective it's not.
>> Don't think it makes all that much sense to resubmit the completion
>> patch though. It's unrelated to the other patches anyways (not sure
>> why you mix them together)
>
> It's all related ..
I don't think it is. You keep claiming that but it's just not true.
You have not so far brought up a single argument why the semaphores
should be changed to completions.
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists